WikiFX

Rispondi

As a trader who seriously evaluates broker terms from both a cost and risk management perspective, I make it a priority to check all fee structures before committing significant funds. Based on my careful review of Nomura Asset Management using the available information, I couldn't find any mention of inactivity fees or related conditions listed in their public details. The broker’s regulatory compliance—with a retail forex license under Japan’s Financial Services Agency (FSA)—gives me some confidence that fee structures would likely be transparent and in line with industry standards in the region, since Japanese regulation is notably strict about client disclosures. However, in line with my conservative approach, I do not make assumptions where specifics are not explicitly provided. When the absence of information about such fees occurs, I take it as a signal to inquire directly with the broker's customer service to confirm. The sole user review I noted commented positively about transparency and customer support, which is encouraging. Nonetheless, from experience, I would never make a funding or trading decision based solely on an absence of fee documentation, especially regarding something as impactful as inactivity charges. For me, direct verification is essential because terms can change or differ based on account type or region. If inactivity fees are a critical factor, I always reach out to the broker for direct clarification before proceeding.